IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1376/CHD/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) SH.RAMJESH SINGH JHAJJ, VS. THE A.C.I.T., # 2355, PHASE-X , CIRCLE 6(1), MOHALI. MOHALI. PAN: ABSPJ5522H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING : 01.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10.08.2017 O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M . : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-2, CHANDIGARH DATED 7.9.2016 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2012-13. 2. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 1.8.2017. HOWEVER, DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 1.8.2017, NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS M OVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INT ERESTED IN PURSUING THE APPEAL AND THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 3. IN OUR ABOVE VIEW, WE GET SUPPORT FROM THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACH ARGEE 2 AND ANOTHER, REPORTED IN 118 ITR 461 (RELEVANT PAGE S 477 & 478) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT : THE APPEAL DOES NOT MEAN MERELY FILING OF THE APPEAL BUT EFFECTIVELY PURSUING IT. 4. OUR VIEW FURTHER FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE FOLLOWI NG DECISIONS ALSO :- I) CIT VS. MULTIPLAN INDIA (P) LTD., 38 ITD 320 (DEL) II) ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR VS.CWT, 223 ITR 480 (MP) 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS (SUPRA), W E DISMISS THE INSTANT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FO R NON- PROSECUTION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 10 TH AUGUST, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH